|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tellenta
Gallente Invicta. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 21:42:00 -
[1]
Originally by: LHA Tarawa There are countless threads with suggestions on how to remove them while giving some compensation to the current holders. There are countless threads where people making such suggestions are called whining babies.
I'd like to have one thread where those in favor of keeping T2 BPOs lay out cogent arguments as to why the game is better with them than it would be if they were removed.
PLEASE, please try to keep this on topic. No red herrings, strawmen, ad hominem, scotsman, appeal to unqualified authority, non sequitur, or any of the other well known logical fallacies. No trolling or name calling or attempts to distract, bully or bury. Just clear, well thought out arguments as to why the game would be damaged if T2 BPOs were removed.
There is no reason to remove T2 BPO's only arguments based on fallacies and the stance that if I can't win one off the lottery anymore no one should have what they have won before me. If T2 BPO's were removed today do you really think it would effect the market in a measurable fashion? The answer in my mind is no, and I have yet to see proof positive that I am wrong.
while running spell check I fixed your mistakes. You're welcome
|
Tellenta
Gallente Invicta. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.17 02:07:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Ruziel inventors can adjust to the ups and downs of the market instead of being a slave to it.
Sadly I don't put that much thought in to it, I have a can labeled "bpo's to copy" and a can labeled BPO's Make copies from the bpo's to copy can move them to my BPO can and repeat and produce until I'm out of BPO's to copy then start again. Granted I'm not focusing on the best things to invent but much like buckshot I'm bound to hit on something
|
Tellenta
Gallente Invicta. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.19 02:19:00 -
[3]
Originally by: LHA Tarawa
Originally by: Bluebeard
Originally by: LHA Tarawa Why is it your opinion that the game is better with T2 BPOs then it would be without them.
Listen to the Eve Economy presentation from last years fanfest. Dr Eyjog answers your question.
Skip forward to 54mins and listen carefully.
Eve Economy
He answers the question with a question.
"If you aquire something something through legal game play, why should you give it up?"
Because it leads to a very few, very rich and powerful alliances that maintain their power through control of these supply constrained resources.
In my opinion, this is bad for the game.
His conclusion is that people have to compete to produce more and admits he has no f'n idea how. In my opinion, they will fail, and the few rich and powerful alliances will continue to grow in wealth and power.
And, as stated repeatedly, I think that is bad.
If you are a rich and powerful alliance it is because of control of moon goo, not T2 BPO's. You are so full of crap.
Courtesy flush anyone geez. |
Tellenta
Gallente Invicta. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.20 17:22:00 -
[4]
Originally by: LHA Tarawa
You started out wanting to have a conversation. Now you have degraded into insult throwing troll.
I find your claim of not being a troll laughable.
Quote: What I refuse to accept is unsupported assertions that do not agree with the evidence.
If CCP changed the T2 BPOs to allow expansion, they when did they say it was to remove bottlenecks? Why was it a one time change to balance supply with requirements rather than a long-term addition of growing supply?
T2 BPO holders could not keep up with demand (This is what a bottle neck is), they had realized by then that the lottery was a rather poor method of distribution so they came up with invention. After a few tweakings they now have a rather functional system that makes current T2 BPO holders whimper about the days of yore before invention was around to destroy their profit margin.
Quote: If lifting the cap on ABCs was about growth, then why did CCP say it was about removing the limited monopoly available to few?
Look at that hurf blurf.
Quote: Where did I ever say that I think T2 BPOs made the ubber alliances rich? I said it allows the very rich to have an easier time staying that way. This leads to few larger alliances.
Read what you type.
Quote: You can't define any opinion you don't like into a lie. You can't just assert something that does not align with the data and expect me to accept it as true.
If it works for you why can't it work for me?
As for that other poster that thinks that the counter arguement is from T2 BPO holders, you are wrong I am an inventor if some BPO holder makes 1.3 mill profit when I am making only 1 mill profit when selling at the same price color me unconcerned seeing how I made 100 of that item in the time it would take him to make 11 - 13 of the same.
Either way thanks for the chuckles.
|
Tellenta
Gallente Invicta. Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.21 09:30:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Khelvaster I'm seeing some hardcore economics fail here. The presence of BPOs is actually decreasing the price of certain T2 items.
Invention had a serious effect on the reduction of T2 prices through the massive influx of competition. I have as of yet to stumble across an item where I am not making profit through invention so I am having an issue taking your statement to heart, well ok EM plates was a bust. Care to cite what items are being sold under invention costs (that is a desirable item). At the moment it just looks like good economic theory, but I think it overlooks economic fact.
|
|
|
|